Having looked into the matter further, I can safely say that mistakes
were indeed made. The following is my analysis.
On 5/25/19 3:52 PM, omd wrote:
Just a quick note -
The FLR credits Proposal 7778 (in various places) as:
Amended(21) by P7778 'Instant Runoff Improved' (Alexis), 14 Aug 2014
But in fact I submitted it:
https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-business/2015-July/033799.html
This claim is substantiated, with a big asterisk.
And it was actually adopted on 14 Aug 201*5*:
This claim is perfectly substantiated.
https://mailman.agoranomic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/agora-official/2015-August/011118.html
Confusing things further, the resolution message incorrectly lists the
author as yet a third individual – scshunt –
scshunt was a previous player name for Alexis. When e switched eir
player name to Alexis, all eir ruleset attributions were changed to
reflect this. Had this proposal been drafted by who was then scshunt,
there would be no error.
and it would have
self-ratified under rule 2034...
For the reference of readers, selections from the text of rule 2034/10
follow:
Rule 2034/10 (Power=3)
Vote Protection and Cutoff for Challenges
A public message purporting to resolve an Agoran decision
constitutes self-ratifying claims that...
4. (if the indicated outcome was to adopt a proposal) such a
proposal existed, was adopted, and took effect.
To me, this seems to point to the proposal's attributes changing due to
the self-ratification.
though I'm not sure whether
self-ratification would affect the type of historical annotations
involved here.
For this, I consult the current ruleset. Selections from the text of
rule 1681 follow:
Rule 1681/21 (Power=1)
The Logical Rulesets
The Full Logical Ruleset (FLR) is a format of the ruleset. In this
format, rules are assigned to the same category and presented in
the same order as in the SLR. The FLR must contain all the
information required to be in the SLR, and any historical
annotations which the Rulekeepor is required to record....
Whenever a rule is changed in any way, the Rulekeepor SHALL record
a historical annotation to the rule indicating:
1. The type of change.
2. The date on which the change took effect.
3. The mechanism that specified the change.
4. If the rule was changed due to a proposal, then that proposal's
ID number, author, and co-author(s) (if any).
Because it appears that Proposal 7778 itself was changed by the
resolution of the decision so that its author was scshunt/Alexis, I
believe this means that I am to report that Alexis is the author. I
believe simply ratifying a document changing the author of Proposal 7778
to omd would be sufficient.
IN CONCLUSION, the date reported in the annotation will be changed but
the author's name will not.
--
Trigon
